Follow Us:
Thursday, October 28, 2021

High growth made ‘bourgeoisie’ vote Cong,nuke deal tough to explain: CPM’s wisdom in defeat

The CPM has admitted for the first time that the high economic growth achieved by the UPA Government...

Written by Manoj C G |
June 27, 2009 3:09:43 am

The CPM has admitted for the first time that the high economic growth achieved by the UPA Government was one of the reasons that helped the Congress in the Lok Sabha elections while the Indo-US nuclear deal,on which it broke ties with the Congress,did not strike a chord with the masses.

The review of the election results brought out the differences in the party on withdrawal of support to the UPA over the nuclear deal,forcing the Central Committee to accept that it was an “issue which was difficult to explain to the people.” Despite efforts to link it to the overall strategic alliance with the US,“it could not become an issue to rally the people around the stand of the party,” the review said.

“In the election campaign,the Congress avoided making this (nuclear deal) a major election issue. Nor were we able to make this an issue for mobilising the people,” the election review report of the Central Committee said. Earlier,General Secretary Prakash Karat had indicated that there were differences in the CPM on breaking ties with the UPA.

Interestingly,the CPM,which had stalled many of the economic reforms the UPA tried to push through,concluded that the “high growth” registered by the economy helped the Congress. The effects of the global financial meltdown,which hit the economy at the fag end of the UPA rule,were not as widespread to impact the “earlier four years of growth and welfare measures.”

“Behind the success of the Congress is the big support it received from the most powerful strata of the ruling classes,the big bourgeoisie. There has been a consolidation of support from this strata for the Congress. This is because under the Manmohan Singh government,the big bourgeoisie has benefited enormously. The four years of high growth provided them unprecedented gains,” the review said.

The CPM,which had constantly accused the UPA government of pursuing “anti-people” policies,also admitted that the Congress received the support of the minorities,the middle-class,young voters and women while the Sixth Pay Commission and some of the welfare measures adopted by the Government also had an impact.

The Central Committee came to the conclusion that the call for an alternative government at the Centre “could not carry much conviction.” “The reliability of some of the (Third Front) partners was suspect given the fact that after the elections they could go to any side. That such a combination would be able to choose a credible Prime Minister was also in doubt,” it said.

The party also admitted that the Politburo and the Central Committee had imposed the alliances in Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu against the wishes of the respective state units. While the Andhra unit was against the alliance with the TDP,the Tamil Nadu committee was divided on the tie-up with the AIADMK.

While reviewing the results in West Bengal,Kerala and Andhra,the Central Committee has concluded that there was “disturbing erosion” of party standards and communist values among the comrades. “Parliamentarism leading to violation of party norms,sabotage of party candidates,coming under the influence of money or caste considerations,cases of corruption,nepotism and behaviour of cadres alienating the people from the party have been noticed. Such problems have been reported in other states too,” it said. In Kerala and West Bengal,it said the party machinery failed to judge the opinion of the people. Worse,the party units wrongly estimated the results before counting.

📣 The Indian Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@indianexpress) and stay updated with the latest headlines

For all the latest News Archive News, download Indian Express App.

  • Newsguard
  • The Indian Express website has been rated GREEN for its credibility and trustworthiness by Newsguard, a global service that rates news sources for their journalistic standards.
  • Newsguard